Red Sox: Hoarding prospects doesn't work. Just buy a team.

[Spanky99]

Replied to your post prematurely, but there's been very good players from Cuba long before them. It should be our market though, Asia and South America combined.

[TwistedLogic]

Replied to your post prematurely, but there's been very good players from Cuba long before them. It should be our market though, Asia and South America combined.

 

By prematurely you mean that you replied before even reading the second sentence.

 

Based on the line of thinking displayed in your post, the Jays should have also bid on and signed Daisuke, correct?

[Spanky99]

By prematurely you mean that you replied before even reading the second sentence.

 

Based on the line of thinking displayed in your post, the Jays should have also bid on and signed Daisuke, correct?

 

Sure, why not? Keep building that strawman.

[TwistedLogic]

I don't get why you're making excuses for the front office, they whiffed along with 29 other teams on Chapman and Yu, but this club needed to take that risk? Attracting FA's is obviously troublesome, along with guys in trade, this was/is the market Toronto should be Targeting, what about Tanaka/Ishikawa/Ichiro, or Maeda about to be posted among others? We've missed on a bunch of Cubans to boot. It's all hind sight now for the clubs that missed the boat, but it doesn't excuse anyone of them, this is their business, is it not?

 

I love how anytime someone doesn't agree with the popular opinion, it means they're taking a side or "making excuses for the front office". I have absolutely no reason to do that, and nothing to gain by doing so. I just prefer to look at things objectively without the lens of a blind angry homer and without basing my opinions completely and utterly on hindsight and revisionist history.

 

Their business is to build a roster and take calculated risks within the parameters allowed to them by their ownership. Darvish at the time was not a risk they felt comfortable taking (or weren't afforded the opportunity by ownership), and there was no past precedence to argue otherwise. Based on how high the Rangers' bid was compared to everyone else, 28 other GM's seemed to agree. They were all wrong, yes, but they were all correct on passing on Daisuke as well. Tanaka's contract looked like an atrocious overpay at the time, and it looks even worse now after he missed most of the season in a year that was key for the Yankees.

 

I do agree that they've choked on the Cuban market. Where there wasn't a very large historical track record beforehand, Cespedes set a precedent by proving that it was a fruitful market. Puig further cemented the legitimacy of that market as a genuine source of premium talent. They should have been heavily in on Abreu, and after Abreu showed tremendous success himself, they should have been in on Castillo. They should be doing everything they can right now to scout, and possibly even sign Tomas. Cuban bats have shown absolutely no trouble in transitioning to the major leagues as of yet.

[TwistedLogic]

Sure, why not? Keep building that strawman.

 

It's not a strawman in the least. Just because it hurts your stance, it's a strawman? Your argument is based in its entirety on the idea that the international market is the Jays' most viable source of acquiring talent and that they absolutely need to take those risks. Which is why if you have any interest in taking a logical standpoint, you should agree entirely that they should have signed Daisuke. They need to take those risks right? Why should they only be criticized for missing out on the players that wind up being good? At the time of their signings, they're all similar types of risks right?

 

This is why so many people on these boards have trouble showing any credibility in their arguments whatsoever. You guys base every single one of your judgements on the crutch of hindsight. Nobody ever puts themselves in the position of an actual executive in these FO's and tries to assess these situations through that lens.

[Spanky99]

By prematurely you mean that you replied before even reading the second sentence.

 

Based on the line of thinking displayed in your post, the Jays should have also bid on and signed Daisuke, correct?

 

Also, funny, you worry about the part I suggest where I admitteded to making a mistake, and U completely ignore my original post?

[TwistedLogic]

Also, funny, you worry about the part I suggest where I admitteded to making a mistake, and U completely ignore my original post?

 

Funny and ironic. Another premature post. Doing things prematurely seems to be your thing tonight.

 

Scroll up buddy. You'll find that response for your original post.

[Spanky99]

 

 

It's not a strawman in the least. Just because it hurts your stance, it's a strawman? Your argument is based in its entirety on the idea that the international market is the Jays' most viable source of acquiring talent and that they absolutely need to take those risks. Which is why if you have any interest in taking a logical standpoint, you should agree entirely that they should have signed Daisuke. They need to take those risks right? Why should they only be criticized for missing out on the players that wind up being good? At the time of their signings, they're all similar types of risks right?

 

This is why so many people on these boards have trouble showing any credibility in their arguments whatsoever. You guys base every single one of your judgements on the crutch of hindsight. Nobody ever puts themselves in the position of an actual executive in these FO's and tries to assess these situations through that lens.

 

Holy f***...worlds tiniest violin.

 

As for Dice K, I said sure amongst 100's of thousands that wanted him, and yes, it's the same.

[TwistedLogic]

Holy f***...worlds tiniest violin.

 

As for Dice K, I said sure amongst 100's of thousands that wanted him, and yes, it's the same.

 

Right, and those hundreds of thousands of people were wrong on Daisuke, and had they had their way, they would have bought into an albatross that hamstrung the payroll at a time where it wasn't nearly as high as it is now. Not only that, but the scars of the Daisuke contract would probably have made it impossible for you to create a strong enough marketing pitch that Rogers would have bought into on a very similar case, so it probably would have left the Jays entirely out on Darvish anyway.

 

So really, the Jays taking the route they did on Japanese players basically just ended up saving them $100M.

 

Thanks for helping me prove my point.

[Spanky99]

I love how anytime someone doesn't agree with the popular opinion, it means they're taking a side or "making excuses for the front office". I have absolutely no reason to do that, and nothing to gain by doing so. I just prefer to look at things objectively without the lens of a blind angry homer and without basing my opinions completely and utterly on hindsight and revisionist history.

 

Their business is to build a roster and take calculated risks within the parameters allowed to them by their ownership. Darvish at the time was not a risk they felt comfortable taking (or weren't afforded the opportunity by ownership), and there was no past precedence to argue otherwise. Based on how high the Rangers' bid was compared to everyone else, 28 other GM's seemed to agree. They were all wrong, yes, but they were all correct on passing on Daisuke as well. Tanaka's contract looked like an atrocious overpay at the time, and it looks even worse now after he missed most of the season in a year that was key for the Yankees.

 

I do agree that they've choked on the Cuban market. Where there wasn't a very large historical track record beforehand, Cespedes set a precedent by proving that it was a fruitful market. Puig further cemented the legitimacy of that market as a genuine source of premium talent. They should have been heavily in on Abreu, and after Abreu showed tremendous success himself, they should have been in on Castillo. They should be doing everything they can right now to scout, and possibly even sign Tomas. Cuban bats have shown absolutely no trouble in transitioning to the major leagues as of yet.

 

JESUS CHRIST!!

 

cf

[Spanky99]

right, and those hundreds of thousands of people were wrong on daisuke, and had they had their way, they would have bought into an albatross that hamstrung the payroll at a time where it wasn't nearly as high as it is now. Not only that, but the scars of the daisuke contract would probably have made it impossible for you to create a strong enough marketing pitch that rogers would have bought into on a very similar case, so it probably would have left the jays entirely out on darvish anyway.

 

So really, the jays taking the route they did on japanese players basically just ended up saving them $100m.

 

Thanks for helping me prove my point.

 

lol....k...............

[Spanky99]

 

 

It's not a strawman in the least. Just because it hurts your stance, it's a strawman? Your argument is based in its entirety on the idea that the international market is the Jays' most viable source of acquiring talent and that they absolutely need to take those risks. Which is why if you have any interest in taking a logical standpoint, you should agree entirely that they should have signed Daisuke. They need to take those risks right? Why should they only be criticized for missing out on the players that wind up being good? At the time of their signings, they're all similar types of risks right?

 

This is why so many people on these boards have trouble showing any credibility in their arguments whatsoever. You guys base every single one of your judgements on the crutch of hindsight. Nobody ever puts themselves in the position of an actual executive in these FO's and tries to assess these situations through that lens.

 

lol... the Irony

[Smokey]

I love how anytime someone doesn't agree with the popular opinion, it means they're taking a side or "making excuses for the front office". I have absolutely no reason to do that, and nothing to gain by doing so. I just prefer to look at things objectively without the lens of a blind angry homer and without basing my opinions completely and utterly on hindsight and revisionist history.

 

Their business is to build a roster and take calculated risks within the parameters allowed to them by their ownership. Darvish at the time was not a risk they felt comfortable taking (or weren't afforded the opportunity by ownership), and there was no past precedence to argue otherwise. Based on how high the Rangers' bid was compared to everyone else, 28 other GM's seemed to agree. They were all wrong, yes, but they were all correct on passing on Daisuke as well. Tanaka's contract looked like an atrocious overpay at the time, and it looks even worse now after he missed most of the season in a year that was key for the Yankees.

 

I do agree that they've choked on the Cuban market. Where there wasn't a very large historical track record beforehand, Cespedes set a precedent by proving that it was a fruitful market. Puig further cemented the legitimacy of that market as a genuine source of premium talent. They should have been heavily in on Abreu, and after Abreu showed tremendous success himself, they should have been in on Castillo. They should be doing everything they can right now to scout, and possibly even sign Tomas. Cuban bats have shown absolutely no trouble in transitioning to the major leagues as of yet.

 

 

It's not a strawman in the least. Just because it hurts your stance, it's a strawman? Your argument is based in its entirety on the idea that the international market is the Jays' most viable source of acquiring talent and that they absolutely need to take those risks. Which is why if you have any interest in taking a logical standpoint, you should agree entirely that they should have signed Daisuke. They need to take those risks right? Why should they only be criticized for missing out on the players that wind up being good? At the time of their signings, they're all similar types of risks right?

 

This is why so many people on these boards have trouble showing any credibility in their arguments whatsoever. You guys base every single one of your judgements on the crutch of hindsight. Nobody ever puts themselves in the position of an actual executive in these FO's and tries to assess these situations through that lens.

 

Look at you bleeding all over the place again like a bitch on her rag... Smh

[TwistedLogic]

Look at you bleeding all over the place again like a bitch on her rag... Smh

 

Feeling needy again? Should I be flattered that your desperate pleas for attention are always targeted at me? Does it hurt your poor little feelings that bad that I don't remember who you are? Is my acknowledgement that dear to you?

[Spanky99]

Look at you bleeding all over the place again like a bitch on her rag... Smh

 

It's kind of sad, honestly, I suggested a market we should target, and got a mountain of fluff as you eluded to. I don't even agree with you yet Smokey, but if they fail this year, get rid of the lot. I'm sure TL can come up with something regarding AA having a pollop the size of an Eggplant and couldn't bid on IFA's or something. Hindsight's a bitch.

[TwistedLogic]

JESUS CHRIST!!

 

cf

 

lol....k...............

 

lol... the Irony

 

Informative. It's okay, it's my fault for forgetting that I probably shouldn't try to get into constructive debates with you. Let's keep it to jokes about drinking, awkwardly creative insults to trolls, and trite and nonsensical statements in ALL CAPS.

[Smokey]

Feeling needy again? Should I be flattered that your desperate pleas for attention are always targeted at me? Does it hurt your poor little feelings that bad that I don't remember who you are? Is my acknowledgement that dear to you?

 

Why don't you try taking a look at your own avatar before accusing anyone else of being an attention seeker. I thought this was a baseball forum, not e-harmony.

[TwistedLogic]

Why don't you try taking a look at your own avatar before accusing anyone else of being an attention seeker. I thought this was a baseball forum, not e-harmony.

 

lol @ how precious it is that you of all people on this board is talking about avatars.

 

It's common for people to use pictures of models and actresses on forums; it makes it easier on the eyes. Nobody here is dumb enough to think that I'm trying to relate myself with a model. If a picture of Paul Beeston where he looks like a sex offender is what appeals to you, then more power to you; different strokes for different folks.

 

You spend the bulk of your time on this forum seeking me out and constantly quoting my posts, going out of your way to make personal insults and (unsuccessfully) get a rise out of me... yeah, that seems a lot more like attention seeking than having a certain kind of avatar.

Edited November 26, 2014 by TwistedLogic

[Spanky99]

Informative. It's okay, it's my fault for forgetting that I probably shouldn't try to get into constructive debates with you. Let's keep it to jokes about drinking, awkwardly creative insults to trolls, and trite and nonsensical statements in ALL CAPS.

 

K.....................

[Spanky99]

Informative. It's okay, it's my fault for forgetting that I probably shouldn't try to get into constructive debates with you. Let's keep it to jokes about drinking, awkwardly creative insults to trolls, and trite and nonsensical statements in ALL CAPS.

 

Informative, is that what you call it, as soon as I see paragraphs of input, I'd rather shoot my eye out, eat s***, sleep naked on a buoy below freezing than read fluff, get to the f***ing point.

[TwistedLogic]

Informative, is that what you call it, as soon as I see paragraphs of input, I'd rather shoot my eye out, eat s***, sleep naked on a buoy below freezing than read fluff, get to the f***ing point.

 

Exactly. I should know better than to give you that much credit and to think something longer than two sentences will be able to hold your attention before, oh hey look a birdie!

[Spanky99]

Exactly. I should know better than to give you that much credit and to think something longer than two sentences will be able to hold your attention before, oh hey look a birdie!

 

Or someone who can hold attention past 2 sentences without saying...WTF?

[Spanky99]

Exactly. I should know better than to give you that much credit and to think something longer than two sentences will be able to hold your attention before, oh hey look a birdie!

 

Your 4 paragraph BS, holds as much water as one , if any, depends on folk. Period, dumbass.

[Spanky99]

Yeah.......tumbleweeds and crickets wench, you are a hoochie, right?

 

All cause of little o YU!!

[TwistedLogic]

Or someone who can hold attention past 2 sentences without saying...WTF?

 

http://i.gyazo.com/f28ca104a17c3a4ff248b23ac9eccfd3.png

 

You quoted my post at 8:03 and said "K....". 9 minutes later, you quoted the exact same post and said something else, as if you completely forgot that you already commented on it.

 

No offence to the writing style that you prefer, but I'd rather take 2 minutes to write a paragraph and make my point off the bat than make a useless fragmented post, sit there dwelling on the person's comment for 10 minutes, and then realize I have something else to add.

[TwistedLogic]

Yeah.......tumbleweeds and crickets wench, you are a hoochie, right?

 

All cause of little o YU!!

 

I usually like you as poster on this site, until you occasionally go on these drunken tirades, where you cease making sense and end up needing to take five different posts to get half of a point across.

 

Anyways, I'm going to dip out of this conversation since it's lead to nowhere, enjoy spamming the boards.

[Spanky99]

http://i.gyazo.com/f28ca104a17c3a4ff248b23ac9eccfd3.png

 

You quoted my post at 8:03 and said "K....". 9 minutes later, you quoted the exact same post and said something else, as if you completely forgot that you already commented on it.

 

No offence to the writing style that you prefer, but I'd rather take 2 minutes to write a paragraph and make my point off the bat than make a useless fragmented post, sit there dwelling on the person's comment for 10 minutes, and then realize I have something else to add.

 

Shaddup you pedantic piece of s***...

 

I SAID GOOD DAY!!

[Spanky99]

I usually like you as poster on this site, until you occasionally go on these drunken tirades, where you cease making sense and end up needing to take five different posts to get half of a point across.

 

Anyways, I'm going to dip out of this conversation since it's lead to nowhere, enjoy spamming the boards.

 

I usually like your posts, until you think your in my door? Weird, was that the doorbell?

[Spanky99]

DING f***ING DONG!!!

 

cf

[TwistedLogic]

Your 4 paragraph BS, holds as much water as one , if any, depends on folk. Period, dumbass.

 

You know, I'd try not to be as liberal at throwing out the word "dumbass" if I was in your shoes. Just saying.

 

Shaddup you pedantic piece of s***...

 

I SAID GOOD DAY!!

 

No you didn't really say "Good Day" until you actually just said it right now.

 

Pedanticism is fun.